The national media has had a heyday with the Duke rape case since the story broke last year.

The problem is that the media has missed the real issue in this case. It’s not whether a district attorney has mistreated some wealthy white boys wrongfully accused of rape. It is conceded that the rape charge should not have been filed and the local district attorney may have committed some serious ethical lapses.

But what is also conceded by the players and those at the party is that two African-American women (exotic dancers) were grabbed and fondled, and that the young white men referred to the women using the “N” word, in addition to other racial epithets and derogatory terms for women. Yes, they were strippers, but that doesn’t give men license to grope, grab and otherwise subject the women to racial taunting.

It’s interesting to note the racial overtones in the case. It was not long ago when African-American men were lynched for just looking at white women in North Carolina. Had the incident happened here in San Diego, District Attorney Bonnie Dumanis would have charged the players with hate crimes, sexual battery and conspiracy to violate civil rights.

Ironically, one of the players involved pleaded guilty to a hate crime just a week before the Duke party. He hit a man and called him a “fag.”

In a local case here with similar racial overtones, the D.A. is preparing for trial later this month against a woman charged with assaulting Coronado cop Aaron Mansker. On Sept. 3, Mansker shot San Diego Charger Steve Foley.

The players apparently gathered at a downtown restaurant and generated a huge tab, something like $40,000 in food and (mostly) drink. One would think that Alex Spanos would have paid for limos to drive drunken players home. It’s a tradition; veterans get drunk with the rookies.

Steve Foley left the restaurant with a date in his car. Mansker saw Foley driving erratically. Having lost his own father to a drunk driver, Mansker realized the danger Foley’s drunk driving could cause. He drove up to the vehicle several times and said he was an officer, but Foley says he thought the officer was just a stalker.

Mansker followed Foley home to make an arrest and await backup. Foley approached the officer. Mansker pulled out his gun, fired a warning shot and then, the officer claims, Foley reached into his waist band. So the officer fired at Foley, striking him three times.

Foley’s date then drove toward the officer attempting to knock him down.

Police arrested and charged her with assault on a police officer. Foley has been charged with driving while intoxicated. His blood-alcohol level of 0.233 percent is nearly three times California’s legal limit of 0.08 percent.

Since 1999, Foley has been arrested at least five times, including cases that police say involved alcohol and confrontations with officers, the San Diego Union-Tribune reported.

In April, he was arrested for investigation of resisting arrest, after police said he scuffled with officers. He also was booked for investigation of battery on a police officer and public drunkenness, but the District Attorney’s Office decided there wasn’t enough evidence to bring charges in that case.

Before that, Foley pleaded guilty to drunken driving in Louisiana in 1999 and received probation.

Like the Duke case, the case against Foley does have racial overtones. Some prominent African-American leaders suggest that Foley was singled out because he was an African-American man driving an expensive car (a collector’s dream), and that there was a white woman at his side.

Others don’t believe race plays a role, and that Foley has flouted his celebrity status enough.

And yet others want to know who the women were at the Chargers’ party. Were they dates or “escorts”?

Others question whether there should be a better way for off-duty officers to identify themselves to drivers. Current law suggests that drivers are required to follow the orders of an off-duty officer when that officer takes reasonable steps to make his or her identity known to the driver. And that’s probably what a jury will consider later this month, when the case against the passenger-turned-driver goes to the jury.